CycliC Step Sequencer

CycliC, is a software-based step sequencer,developed in collaboration with Olivier Gillet of Mutable Instruments.

It is based on a very straightforward concept: up to 6 independent “subsequences” traverse through a 32 step note array. Each of these subsequences can send MIDI information to a unique MIDI device and/or channel. Active notes within the note array can be selected at random, as can the note values themselves. Notes can also be constrained to musical scales if desired (thanks to VJ Manzo’s Modal Object Library!). The sequencer can run off of an internal clock, or via MIDI clock, and its presets can be selected via MIDI program change messages. Each subsequence can also be “reset” to its starting point at any time.

In new version 1.5 of the software, VST plugin instruments are now supported, and per-step velocity and gate parameters are added, as well as two continuous controller (CC) messages that can also be sent on a per-step basis. In addition, CC messages can now be used to control the software (including an easy to use MIDI learn function for assigning your controller to interface elements.)

The bottom line is that in many ways, this sequencer is quite simple, but incredibly powerful. It reminds me of the hardware/software Klee, as I often get very musical and unexpected patterns from it (especially when using the randomize features, as well as the individual subsequence “resets”). But unlike the Klee, you don’t need to pore over the manual to understand what the heck is going on!

Hat’s off to Olivier for the great original idea for this, as well as feedback along the way during its creation!

It is cross-platform, Mac and Windows. Check the web site for more info, downloadable demo, videos, etc…

Thanks for the feedback – I see what you mean (now that I look at a photo of the genoQs device), in that there is a similarity between the circular layout set next to a series of linear elements. But that is purely coincidental. And in looking through the Octopus manual online, there is definitely no similarity in the function of the circle nor the linear elements…

I’m *all about* attribution of credit where it is due – please see some of my other products as examples (either in the product descriptions themselves when replicating hardware devices in software, or in the documentation where I was influenced by other existing software products). But In this case though, there genuinely was no influence.